I think being owgr number 1 is still underrated and for that alone he should be in HOF.

A tremendous feat, no doubt. Donald sat on the throne for 40 consecutive weeks at his peak in 2011-12, 56 weeks in all after trading seats with Rory throughout the summer of 2012. But no majors, not even a Players', and his win total is one shy of the requisite 15 under current qualification criteria.

What about Martin Kaymer? 8 weeks total, 2 majors and 23 professional wins (3 PGA, 11 Euro) - he is in under current criteria.

Lee Westwood? 22 weeks total, 42 professional wins (2 PGA, 23 Euro - good for T-8 all-time on the ET) - also good enough under current criteria.

So despite Donald having the more impressive run as #1, he never closed the deal in one of the 5 biggest events during that span, and his career win total would keep him out were his career to end today. Luke Donald is not a name that will be memorable 50 years from now. Granted, guys like Shaun Micheel or Ben Curtis may not be either, but at least they have the potential to be an answer to a trivia question!

Weight should be given to a stint at #1, but I'm not sure how you normalize it for length. Under the current criteria, a win is a win is a win, but how do you weight a 2-week #1 vs. a 20-week #1? Too much subjectivity IMO.

The WGHOF assigns special value to winning the Players', which (IMO) is one of the reasons Couples' record is superior to that of Scott's. Also two Vardon's and POTY's. Probably a bit of a penalty against Adam on that front as he has played more internationally rather than focusing on the PGA Tour, but I think this is a great comparison of a couple guys that could have achieved so much more. Many reasons why they didn't.

Just hard in my opinion to leave a guy who was under the system dubbed the best player in the world out of the HOF. I get his resume isn’t ideal but being world number has to be something that in 50 years you remeber compared to 20 tour wins.

Slippery slope but with how hard it is to reach number one I say that should be an auto entry and you go into the owgr hall at the Hof

Just hard in my opinion to leave a guy who was under the system dubbed the best player in the world out of the HOF. I get his resume isn’t ideal but being world number has to be something that in 50 years you remeber compared to 20 tour wins.

Slippery slope but with how hard it is to reach number one I say that should be an auto entry and you go into the owgr hall at the Hof

Sorry, I completely disagree. #1 OWGR is a made up ranking using made up criteria.

What about all of the guys that could have been number one if Tiger didn’t have a stranglehold on it for a decade?

Wins are what matter. 20 wins is significantly more important than being the so called number one player.

Just hard in my opinion to leave a guy who was under the system dubbed the best player in the world out of the HOF. I get his resume isn’t ideal but being world number has to be something that in 50 years you remeber compared to 20 tour wins.

Slippery slope but with how hard it is to reach number one I say that should be an auto entry and you go into the owgr hall at the Hof

Sorry, I completely disagree. #1 OWGR is a made up ranking using made up criteria.

What about all of the guys that could have been number one if Tiger didn’t have a stranglehold on it for a decade?

Wins are what matter. 20 wins is significantly more important than being the so called number one player.

Tiger was clearly the best in the world at that point , no arguing about it. Everyone’s using the same criteria it’s not like it’s favoring Luke Donald to make him number one ..... being the best in the world should account for getting into the HOF

Just hard in my opinion to leave a guy who was under the system dubbed the best player in the world out of the HOF. I get his resume isn’t ideal but being world number has to be something that in 50 years you remeber compared to 20 tour wins.

Slippery slope but with how hard it is to reach number one I say that should be an auto entry and you go into the owgr hall at the Hof

Sorry, I completely disagree. #1 OWGR is a made up ranking using made up criteria.

What about all of the guys that could have been number one if Tiger didn’t have a stranglehold on it for a decade?

Wins are what matter. 20 wins is significantly more important than being the so called number one player.

Tiger was clearly the best in the world at that point , no arguing about it. Everyone’s using the same criteria it’s not like it’s favoring Luke Donald to make him number one ..... being the best in the world should account for getting into the HOF

I agree with you-almost. The hof is a career award normally. A longevity award if you will. Reaching number one, even without a major, is a two year at most endeavor. Without more wins and/or majors it's hard to put him in.

An interesting subject would be a Koepka type career. If he stopped cold or got injured and never won again is he in? Four wins and three majors.

WITBTools for the job!

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .

Game is recovering from total ankle replacement. Getting there and glad to be pain free!

Like Ferguson said, Goosen is probably a nice guy, but it just waters down the HOF, slightly, as it was already watered down.

Not only that? Going to the World Golf HOF is a HUGE waste of time. A whole floor dedicated to Bob Hope. He wasn't a pro golfer. AND there really aren't any exhibits that showcase golfers that you would know. Go play golf instead.

The total career is what matters to me. Not a cut and dried criteria of x number of wins and y majors. Make the cut off whatever and someone is at the bottom. Make it 20 wins and 2 majors and Norman is the cut off. Wadkins and Crenshaw would both be out. I'll take the top few from every era and enshrine then.

WITBTools for the job!

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .

Game is recovering from total ankle replacement. Getting there and glad to be pain free!

The total career is what matters to me. Not a cut and dried criteria of x number of wins and y majors. Make the cut off whatever and someone is at the bottom. Make it 20 wins and 2 majors and Norman is the cut off. Wadkins and Crenshaw would both be out. I'll take the top few from every era and enshrine then.

I agree. There are many different combinations that could qualify someone for the HoF.

There has to be some way of pre-screening the candidates though, and I think the current baseline for inclusion on the ballot (15 wins or 2 majors/players) is fine.

Listen it was deserved.I think he won like 3-4 times in 18 months including the British and finished like 2nd or 3 in back to back US opens. If he could putt with any regularity hed have 3-4 majors and 15 wins easily

Like Ferguson said, Goosen is probably a nice guy, but it just waters down the HOF, slightly, as it was already watered down.

Not only that? Going to the World Golf HOF is a HUGE waste of time. A whole floor dedicated to Bob Hope. He wasn't a pro golfer. AND there really aren't any exhibits that showcase golfers that you would know. Go play golf instead.

That horse left the barn long ago. I am not sure I would have too much negative to say about this career after a stroll through the Bob Hope experience.

Listen it was deserved.I think he won like 3-4 times in 18 months including the British and finished like 2nd or 3 in back to back US opens. If he could putt with any regularity hed have 3-4 majors and 15 wins easily

He got a bit lucky in that his 9.9 average points was enough (it usually takes > 10), but I don't have a problem with him getting to #1.

Like Ferguson said, Goosen is probably a nice guy, but it just waters down the HOF, slightly, as it was already watered down.

Not only that? Going to the World Golf HOF is a HUGE waste of time. A whole floor dedicated to Bob Hope. He wasn't a pro golfer. AND there really aren't any exhibits that showcase golfers that you would know. Go play golf instead.

Goose has 2 US Opens.

From what I gather, he grew up in SA, distinguished himself, then played most of his early career in Europe.